[hayleox]

This is very much the case. When employees/employers broadcast negative info about each other, both parties suffer. Obviously, the accused suffers because all this negative info about them is now public, but the accuser also suffers because they look like a jerk for publishing it. Who would want to work with a person/company that is known to talk crap about people they work with?

I think angvp is only publishing this because it's entirely anonymous -- he hasn't named the two employees in question or his company.

[always_good]

    > but the accuser also suffers because they look 
    > like a jerk for publishing it

Or the accused now goes "well, I wasn't going to say anything, but here are all the things I didn't like about you."

Somewhat related, but this is one of the reasons for 5-star inflation in feedback systems like Airbnb.

I recently saw this exchange in a review:

Host: The guest kept the windows open with the A/C on full blast the whole time.

Guest: lol, you were spying on me? I wasn't going to say anything, but your place smelled like human feces.

Looks pretty bad for both parties and not something you want in your history, so my experience with Airbnb is that people give good ratings except for the worst of conditions. I think as far as Airbnb cares, it's working as intended. Everything looks peachy.

[enjo]

I think the question was about the last second to last sentence:

"and always check his background with their previous employers (guy #1)."

[lobotryas]

Maybe rules/practices are different in other countries. Never assume that OP is from US.